Temping Agencies, CV online and Casual Labour

[drpeterwardle]

In fairness to Natalie this all cropped up when I started a thread on casual work and temping and David invited her to join in the discussion.

It is clear to me that Natalie is at that stage of a business startup when she is not quite ready to go public with everything. Equally she is finsishing off an MA thesis and thus is busy in any event. I am not sure it would be right to expect her to tell us exactly what her business plan is. I am not sure it is neccessary to know all the detail of commercial archaeology but it will of course help. I think what we need to know in due course is:

As employers
1. When will she actually be trading.
2. What does it cost.
3. What is the service that is being offerred
4. What garantuees to we have
5. What are the terms of business.
6. Who she is.

For employees.
They will want to know:
1. Pay and conditions
2. Length of employment
3. Where they will be working
4. What the training will be

I have to say that when I set up in business the core of the business what not thought possible by the entire archaeological world and people were very paranoid about what I was doing.

If Natalie has the time I suggest that see prepares a set of FAQs which she can use on her website.

My original posting was about the ethics of "casual" labour as a means of employment and if we should accept the reality of employment in archaeology at present and if BAJR could improve the situation.

David responded thus:

"You will be glad to know that part of the big BAJR expansion (too many pies!!) my wife is taking on the Education (THERA section) and also the CVs online. With someone working on it permenantly it means that up to date will actually mean that! and knowing where people are, what they want to do.... what they can do and when they are available will be all part of the service... a service I hasten to add that will cost nought!! oh yes you heard it hear... for at least the first year of this (until we truely find out the workload) it will provide realtime info on who is available .... great minds think alike.!"

I actually see these as in some respects complementary things. Can we return to discussing the pro and cons of the principle of casual labour rather than getting bogged down in detail about Archpeople?

What would both employers and employees like CVs online to do?

Peter Wardle

[BAJR Host]

A perfect posting sir... (as troll would say)

You have summed up the overall reasons, thoughts and musings.

I do hope that we can have a real discussion on this issue, which in principal is of great benefit to heritage professionals.

Another day another WSI?

[drpeterwardle]

David,

I would certainly use a real time database to hire temps. I donot think that this should be a free service. I would prefer to pay for something good. The difficulty is how to do this without eroding the amount the employee gets.

One easy way to start this would be a database for proper free lancers, sub-contractors etc, which BAJR does not have at present.

I think what you are suggesting has potential. What I am after is a cheap easy fast service that would give me what I want.

Given that one of the difficulties in archaeology is continuity of employment surely anything which reduces this is no bad thing. In the various periods of unemployment I had before I set up in business I was grateful for literally anything. It is far from ideal in the long term but in the short term such things do have there benefits.

Being self employed in many respects is just an extreme form of temping in many respects.

Peter Wardle

[kevin wooldridge]

quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
My original posting was about the ethics of "casual" labour as a means of employment and if we should accept the reality of employment in archaeology at present and if BAJR could improve the situation.

Well to be absolutely honest there are no ethics in the casualisation of any workforce.

Construction industry unions have shown that there is a direct link between casualisation and worsening in Health and Safety conditions. The dock and transport unions have shown that casualisation has resulted in a decline in employment conditions. The teaching unions have shown that casualisation results in lower average wages in UK education. Many of the redundancies recently announced by various National Health PCTs are a result of, or directly affect, casually employed staff. Both Prospect and Unison (the two unions that represent the majority of unionised archaeologists) have ongoing campaigns against the casualisation of any sectors of their represented workforces. Casualisation through its 'cash in hand' nature, encourages evasion of tax, insurance and contributory benefit payments. Casualisation is often the result of short-term political fixing where jobs are publicly 'axed' as an exercise in financial machismo only to be replaced by casual labour when the claimed 'redundancy' of the post is revealed to be illusory.

To summarise, casualisation can be shown to be dangerous, detrimental to wages, terms and conditions,divisive and unnecessary.

However, now we turn to archaeology....

How could someone suggest that casualisation in archaeology might not be such a bad thing?. In terms of Health and Safety, the main employers organisation (SCAUM), despite several requests, refuses to make their Health and Safety manual freely available to archaeologists. Wages in archaeology are a joke with the vast majority of employers still paying their staff less than the EU recognised 'dignity' wage. The vast majority of field archaeologists are employed on ST or fixed term contracts. Many do not recieve sick pay or holiday pay. The majority of staff in archaeology are unable to establish continuity of employment, begin each new contract as if they are brand new to the job and receive no official recognition of academic achievement and/or years of in-work experience. The two unions that represent the majority of unionised archaeologists have had little or no success in organising significant improvements in the terms conditions and wages of archaeologists.

Conclusion: Archaeology is ideally suited to casualisation (further casualisation). The lack of an effective policing system within the profession portends that the dangers of casualisation, identified in other industries, are likely to go unchecked. Casualisation will have a minimal effect on the 'transient' part of the UK archaeological population (they are as suggested, already 'casualties') but can only serve to undermine the jobs of that part of the workforce in 'established' or 'semi-established' posts.

My thought: Whether this will happen depends very much on the enthusiasm of individuals to resist its allurements. There are many local and national campaigns fighting casualisation both as a principle and a threat to their communities and community aspirations (I will, if requested, post a list of campaigns on my blog site).

[drpeterwardle]

I have to say I disagree with Kevins dogma. I am suggesting realism and how to mitigate the bad parts.

In some industries I would suggest casualisation has lead to better wages - for example in IT. As somebody who is self employed I get no money if I dont work. At the moment I can see that I have enough work for the next month. This is unusual. Somebody has just paid me so all is well. I do however like the freedom of being self employed and now I look forward to the quiet periods.

I simply do not see the link between casulisation and things such as SCAUM safety manual not being freely available. The reality is as Kevin put it:

"The vast majority of field archaeologists are employed on ST or fixed term contracts. Many do not recieve sick pay or holiday pay."

This is far from ideal.

I see nothing wrong in employing people on a short term or casual basis when the occassion demands. For example what is wrong in employing students during a vacation (assumming they can do the job)?

What I would suggest is wrong is when this form of employment is used by employers to avoid legal duties or if health and safety standards are reduced.

Peter Wardle

[muddyandcold]

Interesting thread. I have always thought that an archaeological job agency is long overdue. The logistics of such an operation needs considerable thought, really it needs to be run somewhat on the lines of a francise operation, like 'Driver Hire'.

Dr Petes comments are slightly confusing. In earlier messages he is totally in support of the operation, stating that he would be interested in using such a service. Now, he is coming out with statements questioning 'archpeople'. He is now proclaiming the virtues of BAJR CV page. Supported by comments by David - is this a double act?

He asks the following questions:

As employers
1. When will she actually be trading - ever company has to start somewhere
2. What does it cost - ring/email her and ask for a price list.
3. What is the service that is being offerred - I guess archaeological staff
4. What garantuees to we have - like any agency if you get a bad service you don't use them again. She will probably have insurance - ask her
5. What are the terms of business. Again ask her?
6. Who she is. - slightly irrelevant - she is a businessperson setting up a business.

For employees.
They will want to know:
1. Pay and conditions - ask archpeople, I am sure they will tell you
2. Length of employment - like any agency, no guarentee of employment is made
3. Where they will be working - like any agency offers of work can be made, the staff don't have to accept
4. What the training will be - ask her, agencys don't have to provide training, it generally is the responibilty of the worker to train themselves (try working for a agency for a couple of weeks it might well open your eyes)

The majority of these question also apply to BAJR's CV page. So can we have some answers.

Archaeology is a small world, but lets not operate a closed shop. Natalie is taking a risk in setting up a business. She will have to find the cashflow (I sure she realises this). If her staff fail to perform then the business will quickly fail. But hey, lets be supportive and congratulate someone trying a new venture, unless you are course are considering a similar project and want to eliminate the competition?

Not meant to be hostile, but there are questions to be asked to offer a balanced discussion

[BAJR Host]

Very much so Muddy,

Natalie is taking a brave and imaginative step. I don't think people are actually critising her or her idea, merely requesting info on the logistics, which as you can see she has found very useful.

This is not a double act by the way. CVs online has been about for years now... but I always felt it needed more input... not enough time in the day for me to do it to the level that it becomes the resource I wished for. Too many out of date CVs, too many people not needing work from it.. so it needs management... and like all things this will cost ... CVs Online will, like JIS BAJR Jobs be complementary NOT competitors - I wish this success, but lets not get lost in the world of 'good ideas'.

CVs Online. (version 2)

1) Put your CV on for free.
2) Each month you will be contacted and the CV updated.
3) The CV will contain data on if you are or are not available in any given month
4) Access to the CV list will be by subscription (say ?200 per year) for contractors.
5) You can update your own CV anytime
6) IF the feedback about a person shows they have made false claims etc they will be removed.
7) To employ a person from CVs Online, the same minimum pay (dependant on Grade and type of job applies... and Contractors paying less will be questioned and may then have access removed)

So its not really the same as Archpeople... no conflict there at all.

The big question on casual labour comes up in July... with the new legislation on short term contracts...

hope that sets your mind at rest.


Another day another WSI?

[the invisible man]

Yes, I have to say I am very surprised at the misunderstandings about what an agency does (and doesn't do).

CV's Online - is there feedback on usage and success of the existing CV service? I know I have raised this before but there was limited response, and I wonder if employers aren't using it much, will they fork out 200 to start? Of course if its doing a roaring trade, fair enough.

You must excuse me if I'm a bit tetchy today - Spurs are 3-1 down at the moment, with 10 men..

We owe the dead nothing but the truth.

[drpeterwardle]

It would be wrong for me to respond to Muddy?s post in detail. Lets wait and see what Natalie has to offer when she is ready to tell us rather than guessing what she is doing.

Peter Wardle

[BAJR Host]

CVs has had ... patchy success.... the problem was always the out of date info... and the clumsy search interface.

That is going to be sorted... so if you look for an osteologist with 3 plus years experience the only results you will get are those that are actually available for work, rather than having to wade through a pile that are either in work, have given up or whose email is no longer working.

Thats why it would have to cost... (quite reasonable for a years access - if you know that all the CVs are available) it takes a lot of effort to maintain this, it takes phone calls, and time..

Its up to the contractor though... I do chuckle though at cost questions... One recent advertiser was shocked at being asked for ?60 for an advert... well I said, where else have you advertised... needless to say the total spent on news adverts... ?3k + - but ?60 is too much... I am often told by Recruitment firms 'is that all?' but we would pay 10 times that. I keep it cheap and affordable, put in work 7 days a week ... come up with more and more... and still make less than a Supervisor rate. - Me Tetchy and I don't even have an excuse.

I believe in fair pay.. but if I charged what BAJR should be making - I need over 4k a year just to pay for all BAJRs internet needs and phonecalls - then there would be a real outcry.

<rant mode off> Sorry for whining.... but its good for me every so often.[:I]

Another day another WSI?